PDA

View Full Version : Vampire Counts- Not OP just not fun?



Tarliyn
07-05-2009, 14:47
So I have been thinking about this a while and after talking to some at my gaming club I think I know why people hate Vamp Counts so much. They aren't fun to play against.

Now bear with me for a second. 90% of the games I have seen with vamp counts ends as a draw, or a minor victory for the non-vamp counts sides. This is because all causalities caused on the vamp army is healed up and the vamp aremy itself by and large can't do damage back.

Not saying a vamp army can't win here, the vamp player at my gaming club has found a solution to this that being flying guys to flank things.

But besides that he has a hard time winning with his army, and he isn't a horrendus general.

When vamps came out my game store at 3-4 players and now we have 1 and he plays a his delfs more than his vamps now simply because he got bored.

So I put fourth that Vampires get so much heat under the OP category not cause they are Overpower Really but because they are annoy to fight against. Noone likes seeing all the stuff they did last turn instanly healed back and it is most diff annoying that once your 6th turn ends the game board looks almost the same as it did at the beginning of the 1st turn....WOW GOOD USE OF 2 HOURS.

And then for the vamp counts player, having fairly crappy troops that can't do a lot to comparably priced units also sucks

Thats my thoughts

Ixquic
07-05-2009, 14:54
The main problem that I see is that everyone takes the stupid banner and everyone takes the crown of command and getting stuck in a unit with T4 regen that's also unbreakable that you hit on either 4s or 5s is not fun. This is similar to the stupid Blackguard unit of ASF with unkillable lord you see in EVERY Dark Elf army. I recently started changing my list around with a Lahmian theme and it's already much more fun for me and the game isn't so stupid with a big dumb overpower unit in the middle.

7th edition is all about elite unit hammer and it's prevalent in most armies. VC take most of the flack after demons because they can raise up their super unit which wouldn't be so crazy if you could actually kill it easily like you are supposed to be able to.

Necromancy Black
07-05-2009, 14:57
My best games have all been against VC. I find it a fun army to play against.

I honestly have no idea what your problems are. I've seen VC get an even spread of results.

Maybe try playing some different VC players or types of list.

Tarliyn
07-05-2009, 15:06
My best games have all been against VC. I find it a fun army to play against.

I honestly have no idea what your problems are. I've seen VC get an even spread of results.

Maybe try playing some different VC players or types of list.

yeah it should have placed more emphasis this is just what my gaming area has seen and experinced

i have no gt results to back it up or anything like that, just personal exp of myself and other players in my area that got to talking one day about why so many people complain about VC on warseer lol

also like I said there were orginally 3-4 VC players in my area and they almost all left the army because they felt they way I did. So I have had some expereince playing various players and list.



7th edition is all about elite unit hammer and it's prevalent in most armies. VC take most of the flack after demons because they can raise up their super unit which wouldn't be so crazy if you could actually kill it easily like you are supposed to be able to.

yeah I agree the super unit down the middle is an annoying trend that I hope disappears next edition

Keller
07-05-2009, 16:49
I gave up playing my VC in 6th edition because they were boring. I seldom ever lost, I never had to think much. My games came down to using support units as needed, and just pushing my infantry across the table 8" +2D6" at a time. They'd join combat, I'd break them due to fear, persue, yadda yadda yadda. I didn't even play a power-game list; it was typically a Von Carstein Lord backed by a thrall and 1 necro. Not overly magical, nor fighty. My units won combat there was little I had to worry about. I had fun trying differnt lists (Strigoi + living-ghouls; Necrach Death Magic army; Wraith Terror squads) but ultimately the game just became boring when I never had to worry about running away.

With 7th Ed. I broke my VC back out and had some fun with the units. I find the most fun to be trying odd combinations and neat tricks you can do. There are some powers that really change how you play (scouting vampires, anyone?) and keep things interesting and a bit risky. I don't really like the new magic, but I don't load up on it anyway. Ultimately, though, it comes down to troops that just shamble forward and scare enemies away. With the onset of elite units, this is less problematic, but it depends on what you are fighting.

All in all, I find the fun of a VC army to be in the Lore and feel of the army much more so than the play style. I like them, but wouldn't want them to be my only army.


Note: I am by no means a power-gamer. I don't care for tournements or players that are too competetive to be fun. My games are casual for enjoyment.

Malorian
07-05-2009, 16:57
Fighting VC is much like fighting WE. Your game plan has to be completely different than what you are used to if you want to win.

Against WE you have to find a way to deal with an army you can't catch (but when you do you rip them apart), and against VC you can certainly get into combat but once there you are in for a long hard fought fight unless you find a way to break through.

To some people this isn't fun and is boring but I think a big part of it is the long magic phases. If you have two experienced players though you can really speed things up.

PeG
07-05-2009, 18:56
VC with ghoul horde and IoN spam is very different from Blood knight lists, lists with only magic geared vamps are very different from lists with combat vamps. Unless you see a variety you shouldnt say that the army is always boring. As often the most powerful builds are boring but that goes for a lot of other armies as well.

bork da basher
07-05-2009, 19:03
i quite enjoy playing VC, i really love the imagery of the living dead and being a huge zombie movie fan it really gives the game a bit more narrative for me. also generally speaking VC are quite difficult to beat in the hands of a good general and a hard faught game is always more fun for me. i dont think theres anything wrong with them but their unique way of playing makes it difficult to counter because most other armies are very straight forward, against VC you can never know where the next unit will come from or how far a unit will move or recieving charges from units you thought long out of range.
they have enough disadvantages to make them far from perfect. the vampires are the key to victory and they arnt all that difficult to get rid of.
overall i think they are proberly the most interesting and challenging armies to play with or against. its understandable why people dont like playing against them but i quite like the challenge.

sholcomb
07-05-2009, 19:10
It sounds like you see a very similar VC army every time. The VC army is quite versatile in its unit choices and playing style.

W0lf
07-05-2009, 23:03
I dont mind playing vs vamp counts and it always make me laugh when people complain they raise their army.. its what they do.

I am however regretting buying a vamps army over a lizards one. The game is dull, one dice raising is boring and i get no satisfaction from winning.

Erie Ed
07-05-2009, 23:18
I played my buddies VC army once, and found it to be boring as hell...I mean really playing this army is just as boring as playing against it

slingersam
08-05-2009, 00:26
The only reason I did not like versing Vamp Counts is because I felt it was a very slow grind. In all honesty it was a slow game of revival.

Dexter099
08-05-2009, 00:47
Vampire Counts in 6th ed used to be a very interesting army; I was very seriously considering starting them. Then along came the un-fluffy and op vamp count book, and I stop liking them.

Dranthar
08-05-2009, 04:29
I had very much the same experience as Keller did.

I found VCs somewhat dull to play with in 6th edition. It was just too easy to simply push my infantry forward and grind away at my opponents units. Aside from ensuring you don't get flanked I felt there really wasn't much more to it. I eventually abandoned my VCs, tried Dark Elves and eventually settled on Goblins at the start of 7th edition. With goblins, I now need to actually think about psychology. Fleeing is an option, the shooting phase is more than just a "banshee phase" and I actually need to think about how to take down my opponents units with my inferior goblins. For me, WHFB has become much more enjoyable.

Due to my goblins not being fully painted I've dusted off and revised my Vampire counts for some upcoming tournaments. I've played a few games and while some elements are alot more interesting (especially the total revision of how VC magic works in-game), I'm still getting that same feeling I had with 6th ed. I can only imagine it would be worse if I were to use the regeneration banner and/or max out on magic.

Perhaps with more experience in 7th ed this will change (I still need to face some of these ultra-elite units), but in any case I'm looking forward to finishing my goblins, so I can get back to using a really fun army. :rolleyes:

sulla
08-05-2009, 06:53
So I have been thinking about this a while and after talking to some at my gaming club I think I know why people hate Vamp Counts so much. They aren't fun to play against.



My feelings are generally in line with yours on this. A vampire player who bunkers and raises is pretty much like a dwarf with all shooting except an anvil and one or two elite combat units. You just don't get to play much of a game against them.

VC can be played in a high risk/high reward style, it's just that they generally play in a low risk, boring style that uses only a small portion of the bloodlines and spell lore.

Also, 2 corpse carts and a lord with vanhel's pretty much makes light infantry unplayable against them which really forces other armies to limit half their army selection too.

Necromancy Black
08-05-2009, 08:49
My feelings are generally in line with yours on this. A vampire player who bunkers and raises is pretty much like a dwarf with all shooting except an anvil and one or two elite combat units. You just don't get to play much of a game against them.


Oh god, thank you for mentioning dwarfs.

That is a completely boring army to play IMO. VC are way more fun to play then Dwarfs.

W0lf
08-05-2009, 10:49
Depends.

Dwarfs CAN be more fun to play against if they take a combat build, gunlines are boring whatever the flavour.

fubukii
08-05-2009, 10:51
vc armies for the not meant to be OPED are normally ok to play but once you play the usually

Deathstar (gg or bk or regen skels)
15-17pd
doggie ds
FLying vamp list
A vamp army where they hide thier generals unit behind another large unit so he is impossible to get too

then the army goes from being just strong to being overpowered. Now granted i dont mind strong builds or oped ones in a competitive enviroment but denying that they arent ALot more powerful then any other army but DE and daemons is kind of silly.

Leogun_91
08-05-2009, 11:19
Depends.

Dwarfs CAN be more fun to play against if they take a combat build, gunlines are boring whatever the flavour.Defenitively...only time I take missile weapons with them these days are beacouse some thanes has pistols.

I donīt think any army in itself is boring, just some builds and some players.

Rupposed
08-05-2009, 11:35
There's a build for every army that no-one wants to play against. Picking out VC is a little unfair, don't you think? If your one VC player does nothing but ION spam and force draws every game, it's more his fault than the army's. The list has plenty of variation to it, and to not use any of it is more of a lack of creativity on his/her part. Both in list making and playing style.

Desert Rain
08-05-2009, 13:12
I have to agree that they are a bit dull to play against. Not always though, I've had a really funny game against once. (and I've played against the twice). The second game was stupid - when the game was over he had more troops on it than he had had when it started.

Yerun
10-05-2009, 08:29
well as they say, IoN spam IS boring.
I myself play VC and I don't like playing that way.

Most of the time my adversaries then go so magic heavy I can't get enough through that in the end my army just rots away :D

I like the image of a Vampire raping through enemy lines and therefore choose to go combat heavy :D or cause lots of terror :D

I like my Lord on an Abyssal Terror, guided by Black Knights, Konrad with some Ghouls and a chill vampire to keep my skelletons and grave guard marching.

The funnest part of vampires is that you have so many ways to play them. No two games are identical and no two vampires are the same. THAT'S the fun part of being a Vampire!
So many suprises! you see a Vampire but you have NO IDEA what damage he's got up his sleeve!

Yeah I lose a lot of games because I never optimalise my lists but it's always fun to see what builds perform and which builds COULD have done so mauch damage if you'd have had some more luck ^^

Dungeon_Lawyer
10-05-2009, 13:18
Depends.

Dwarfs CAN be more fun to play against if they take a combat build, gunlines are boring whatever the flavour.

NO. Dwarfs are boring not matter what. VC have alot going for them, great models for one. You can make many interesting builds with the VC. Most of the lists posted here on warseer are merely high powered, tourney type lists not meant for casual play. But VC are capable of much more. They are about average fun-wise to play against


well as they say, IoN spam IS boring.
I myself play VC and I don't like playing that way.

Most of the time my adversaries then go so magic heavy I can't get enough through that in the end my army just rots away :D

I like the image of a Vampire raping through enemy lines and therefore choose to go combat heavy :D or cause lots of terror :D

I like my Lord on an Abyssal Terror, guided by Black Knights, Konrad with some Ghouls and a chill vampire to keep my skelletons and grave guard marching.

The funnest part of vampires is that you have so many ways to play them. No two games are identical and no two vampires are the same. THAT'S the fun part of being a Vampire!
So many suprises! you see a Vampire but you have NO IDEA what damage he's got up his sleeve!

Yeah I lose a lot of games because I never optimalise my lists but it's always fun to see what builds perform and which builds COULD have done so mauch damage if you'd have had some more luck ^^
Now I would love to play against lVC lists like this!

agger
10-05-2009, 15:12
This might be a bit beside the point of this thread, but I have been going around thinking about a long term army project, which needs to be something different and unique... and the vampire imagry is just nice...

What i had in mind was something about a Kislev or norse Warlord turned vampire, and one of my central ideas is a undead giant. But is it still allowed as a dogs of war unit?, where can I find the rules for DOW Giants, and is it useable in tournaments etc?

Rupposed
11-05-2009, 01:59
That depends on the tournament, I think. With no US GTs this year it's kind of difficult to say what is or is not legal. If you can track down GT rules from Europe that might give a good idea, or go with 2008's rules.

For club playing, it should be fine. One stubborn model in a sea of unbreakable units might be refreshing.

DoW Giant (http://www.sactosaws.com/SAWSChallenge/giant-rules.pdf)